Chapter 1 Flashcards
(20 cards)
define evidence
the information with which the matters requiring proof in a trial are proved.
what is the study of evidence
the study of the process by which such matters are proved in court
how did Lever argue that parties might regard their treatment
parties are more likely to regard their treatment at the hands of the law as unjust because of what they perceive to be defects of procedure than because of what they perceive to be defects of substantive law
how did Lever argue that the outcome of cases is more likely to be affected by
the outcome of cases is more likely to be affected by procedural rules than by any niceties of substantive law
all evidence in a case must be relevant to …
either a fact in issue or a collateral fact
what is a fact in issue or a fact probandum
is a fact that must be proved by a party in a case in order for that party to succeed in the action- an essential fact
what are the facts in issue dependent on
the substantive law and not on the law of evidence
what are the facts in issue for a murder case
1) D must have caused V’s death
2) D must have MR
1 and 2 constitute the facts in issue in the case
what is a relevant fact
A fact that is not a fact in issue but is relevant to a fact in issue
what is a collateral fact
a fact of which proof may be permitted but which does not constitute a fact in issue or a fact that is relevant to a fact in issue
example of a collateral fact
-credibility of a witness or a ‘credit’
what has the CoA in Thomas v Comr of Police noted on credit and matters relevant to credit (2)
- juries are permitted to use their knowledge of human nature when deciding whether a witness is telling the truth
- the law requires juries to form their subjective through collective view, taking into account demeanour, motive, consistency and other characteristics which they see fit
Shagang Shipping Co
what was said about relevance
- relevance is the paramount consideration
- evidence must be relevant before it can be used in court
DPP v Kilbourne
what was said about evidence (2)
- if the evidence is relevant and does not infringe any exclusionary rule, it will be admissible as a matter of law,
- but may yet be rendered inadmissible by the exercise of a judicial direction to exclude it.
when will relevant evidence be inadmissible
relevant evidence will ve inadmissible either if it infringes an exclusionary rule or if it is excluded in the exercise of discretion
what was held in R v Guney about
‘The question whether evidence is relevant depends not on abstract legal theory but on the individual circumstances of each particular case.’
when is an item of evidence considered relevant
if it renders the fact to be proved more probable than it would be without that evidence
what does E W Cleary say about about a fact being more probable
‘It is enough if the item could reasonably show that a fact is slightly more probable than it would appear without that evidence’
what distinction does Wigmore make between (3)
- a distinction between logical relevance and legal relevance
- Evidence does not satisfy the test of relevance unless it is legally relevant
- for an evidence to e legally relevant, it may be necessary for that item of evidence to possess some ‘plus value’
logical relevance + ‘plus value’ =
sufficient relevance/ legal relevance
